canon serenar 50mm 3.5

[jmilkins]

Hello folks

I'd value your opinion on the serenar 50mm 3.5 RF lens particular the type 8 version 1953- 55. I can find examples and images of the leitz elmar 50mm 3.5 , but not so much on the canon.

I'm assuming lower contrast than "modern" lenses, and would happy with a more "classic" look, but is it a well regarded lens?

thoughts appreciated

 

[raid]

John,

I have read about the perfomance of the Serenar to be higher than that of the Elmar. If the price is right, I would get a Serenar for portraits and landscape photography. Most likely, the coating on the Elmar will be more sensitive to scratches than the Serenar.

Cheers,

 

[VictorM.]

I've had one of these for a long time, long before any Canon rf info was readily available. It's a great lens. Not quite as compact when collapsed as the Elmar, but with a more normal aperture ring. It's very sharp and surprisingly contrasty for an early 1950's lens. I've owned two Elmars and neither was as good as the Serenar 50/3.5. The Elmar slip-on accessories fit and are easier to find than Canon pieces. The filter threads are 34mm.

 

[xayraa33]

for a lower priced lens it is not that common.

 

[harry01562]

In fact, it can be difficult to find, especially in collector condition. I have 2 of the early version that was produced for the SII models. They are good lenses, now that they have been cleaned up by one of our RFF All-Stars. As mentioned, they produce a pleasing, low contrast image. They are very nice for B&W portraits.

I've been looking for a good shooter example of the late production 3.5's.

Harry

 

[jmilkins]

Thank you everyone - I appreciate your combined wisdom!